The Persecution of Charles Krafft

Whenever a person of any prominence expresses interest in or agreement with tabooed ideas like White Nationalism, anti-Semitism, or Holocaust revisionism, the standard Judeo-Leftist strategy is to destroy him socially and economically — unless, of course, there are no legal barriers to outright murder.

The dissident is socially destroyed through public denunciations and whispering campaigns designed to isolate him in a hostile environment by cutting him off from his friends, neighbors, acquaintances, and colleagues, most of whom will distance themselves from any person labeled with “witch” words like “Nazi,” “hater,” etc., lest suspicion fall on them as well.

The target is economically destroyed by pressuring his employers to fire him. Or, if he is self-employed, by pressuring people not to buy, distribute, or advertise his goods and services. Generally, it is harder to economically destroy self-employed individuals, which is one reason why White Nationalists should seek to be self-employed and why the society we aim to create should hew to the classical republican ideal of a broad, self-employed middle class.

In recent years, Seattle artist Charles Krafft has been increasingly outspoken about his interests in Holocaust revisionism and White Nationalist concerns. For instance, Mike Polignano and I have interviewed Charlie for Counter-Currents Radio (part one, part two). We have also featured two short videos about him as Videos of the Day (here and here). Krafft has also been interviewed on Voice of Reason and The White Network. He also uses his Facebook page (2,000+ friends) as a micro-blog, and has been increasingly frank about white identity and interests and the Jewish question.

Graves assembles some quotes from Krafft’s Facebook postings and interviews about the Holocaust and the Jewish question. Then she contacted some of Krafft’s friends and colleagues and invited them to distance themselves from him.

Charles Krafft, Hitler teapot

It was all too easy for Jen to label Charlie some sort of neo-Nazi, since his artworks teem with Hitlers, swastikas, Iron Crosses, and other images associated with National Socialism and the Second World War. Most people took his use of these images as ironic, and that’s obviously true, but Jen Graves claims that the Hitler teapots and windmills with swastika blades are all earnest. Deadly earnest.

If she had contacted me, this is what I would have said. I have known Charles Krafft since 2004. During that time, I have corresponded with him, talked to him on the phone, and met him in person a number of times. I have been a White Nationalist since 2000, and my worldview was fully formed by the time I met Charlie. Even allowing for the fact that it takes time to get to know people, Charlie’s thinking has evolved dramatically over the time that I have known him.

His interest in revisionism goes back to 2000, but based on our conversations, it is my impression that he has only taken White Nationalism seriously as a political idea in the past couple of years. Furthermore, I have never heard him call himself a White Nationalist. Nor have we ever talked about race and racial issues. We talk mostly about art and religion. Thus I would classify Charlie as a believing and practicing historical revisionist. But not all revisionists are White Nationalists, and not all White Nationalists are revisionists. (Holocaust revisionism is not my cup of hemlock, but I support the rights of revisionists in all domains of history.) Thus when it comes to White Nationalism, I think of Krafft more as a metapolitical fellow traveler, whose path intersects with our own, but whose destination and concerns are ultimately more historical, artistic, and spiritual than political.

Charles Krafft, “Von Dutch” windmills

Yet Charlie’s use of Nazi imagery goes back to around 1990, beginning with his swastika-blade delftware windmills, which are a visual pun on the name of his friend Von Dutch (the swastika is associated with Germany, as is the word “von,” and the delftware windmill is obviously Dutch).

Later in the ’90s, Charlie came to be associated with the Slovenian band Laibach and their Neue Slowenische Kunst art collective. Laibach, of course, is famous for their ironic use of Nazi, fascist, and Communist imagery and their exploration of nationalist themes. (See Charlie’s discussion of Laibach here. See my review of their album Volkhere.)

Both Laibach and Krafft use such symbols for more than mere shock value, but they stop well short of using them in earnest or endorsing the worldview that goes with them.

For Laibach, National Socialism is part of European nationalism and totalitarianism, which are central themes of their work. But they are no more National Socialists for using NS imagery than they are communists for using communist imagery or “Vlad the Impalerists” for using his image either.

As for Krafft, the swastika and other Nazi images are merely part of a much broader theme in his work: popular symbols for and images of evil, disaster, and death. Krafft has created artworks commemorating natural and man-made disasters, like earthquakes and wars. He has not just done portraits of Hitler, but also of Aleister Crowley, Charles Manson, Kim Jong-Il, Vladimir Putin, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and even Amy Winehouse — every one of them an embodiment of evil and depravity in the popular imagination.

Krafft does not necessarily endorse the idea that they really are evil, but neither does he endorse them and their actions as good. He is content to let them stand as symbols of evil in our imagination. Then he tweaks them, ironically, to give us some distance on evil — or our ideas and symbols of evil — and he leaves it at that.

Krafft’s art has power and vitality, because it shows us things that we take deadly seriously, and it allows us to laugh at them — or at least give a little Buddha smile. But you cannot laugh at something unless you have overcome it, unless you have risen above it, unless it no longer towers over and oppresses you. Thus laughter is a liberating thing. But of course this does not suit the agenda of dour, politically-correct scolds who want to oppress us with horrors, demoralize us with guilt, and lead us around on chains of moral indignation.

So I would argue that the fact that Charles Krafft uses swastikas no more proves he is a Nazi than his Kim Jong-Il teapots prove he is a follower of Juche. Hitler and the rest of them are part of a larger artistic project of exploring popular symbols of evil — symbols that serve as triggers to feelings of horror and indignation — and using humor and irony to help us rise above them.

I am not, however, claiming that there is no connection between Charles Krafft’s use of Nazi images in his art and his later intellectual journey. Krafft’s ironic use of Nazi images is, of course, repugnant to actual Nazis, who take all of it quite seriously. But Krafft’s art is attractive to people like me, namely White Nationalists who feel what I call “the burden of Hitler,” i.e., people who wish to distinguish their views from National Socialism while also giving just acknowledgement to what Heidegger called its “inner truth and greatness.” Krafft’s art, like Laibach’s, helps me gain some emotional distance and psychological freedom from National Socialism and other forms of totalitarianism, which is a necessary condition for defining a genuinely new “New Right.”

Thus when I first saw Krafft’s work, I sought him out and got to know him. I found Charlie to be a voracious reader and a fount of information. Whenever I talk to him, I always keep a notebook handy to jot down the names of authors and titles of books. Of course I make recommendations too, and I know he follows up on at least some of them.

Charlie is also a connoisseur of strange ideas and human eccentricity, which is good, because our little subculture has much in this way to offer. But he also has a sense of humor and a rational, critical, no-nonsense mind, so he is stimulated but not depressed or corrupted by such phenomena.

Charlie has many friends and acquaintances like me. So given his open but critical mind, voracious reading habits, and wide network of friends in the broad “White Nationalist” milieu, it stands to reason that Charlie’s thinking has evolved in that direction. Because White Nationalism is a fundamentally rational, moral, and enlightened worldview, and he is a fundamentally rational, moral, and enlightened guy.

So my hypothesis is that Krafft’s art brought him into contact with some of the more open-minded people in the White Nationalist subculture, and we may have influenced him just as he has influenced us.

But Charles Krafft does not fit any of the popular media stereotypes of a White Nationalist. He is neither consumed by hate nor nostalgic for the totalitarianism of the 1920s, ’30s, and ’40s. He is pretty close to what I call the “West-Coast White Nationalist” paradigm. His intellectual journey included the Beatniks, the 1960s counter-culture, rock’n’roll, long sojourns in the East, Hinduism and Buddhism, and probably a bit of LSD. He is tolerant, widely-traveled, and has a genuine appreciation of and openness to non-European cultures, particularly of South and East Asia.

But all of that openness to the other does not preclude loving one’s own. I think that Charlie is one of an increasing number of essentially liberal whites who are awakening to the fact that multiculturalism and non-white immigration are threats to the things that liberals hold dear: environmentalism, support for the arts, respect for women, kindness to animals, high wages, safe workplaces, religious tolerance, tolerance for “alternative lifestyles,” safe, inviting public spaces and facilities, walkable communities, etc., none of which are conspicuous in Latin America or the Muslim world, for instance.

But none of these liberal concerns are ever allowed to trump the agenda of white dispossession and race replacement. For instance, in Norway and Sweden, rape has risen to the levels one finds in war zones, almost entirely due to mass immigration from the Muslim world. Yet the leaders of the Left-wing political and media establishments, all of them nominal feminists — at least when it serves as a stick to beat white men — refuse categorically to question the wisdom of non-white immigration and instead cover up the rape crisis and vilify people who speak out about it.

Thus more and more white liberals are realizing that something is deeply corrupt about their political and opinion leaders.

Krafft is also aware of the well-documented role of the organized Jewish community in promoting multiculturalism and non-white immigration in order to displace whites. And he is well-aware of the importance of the Holocaust as as tool for stigmatizing all forms of white ethnic consciousness, even the patriotism of the peoples who fought against the Nazis.

All of these views are fundamentally rational and moral, but in this society it takes great independence of mind to arrive at them and great courage to speak about them openly, in one’s own name. We have to support people like that when the enemy targets them for destruction.

What can we do to support Charlie Krafft?

First of all, if you have been thinking about buying his art, now is the time to do it. (You can contact him through Facebook and his website.)

Third, it would probably be best for all if this controversy died in the pages of The Stranger. Thus I do not recommend commenting on The Stranger article, lest it encourage more press. But if other media pick up the story, and it looks like it will not die down, I will post links and encourage people to write comments.

Finally, if you are one of Charlie’s friends, be prepared to defend him if this campaign escalates. But be careful of speaking to the press. The enemy wishes to socially isolate Charlie and sow discord in our ranks, and they will distort your statements to achieve that. Statements of support can be twisted into the exact opposite.

Fortunately, we don’t need their media anymore. If you want to speak out, speak directly to the public on your own site, Facebook, Twitter, etc. And if you speak to reporters, let them know that you are recording your conversation, or keeping copies of your email correspondence, which you will make public if you are misquoted.

Jen Graves did not do her homework, or even much thinking, for that matter.

Krafft has been using swastika and Hitler imagery since around 1990, but his interest in revisionism began in 2000, and his involvement in White Nationalism dates from only the last couple of years.

So, no, he did not and does not use the swastika or the image of Hitler becuase he is a “Nazi.” Nor does his Ahmadinejad chia pet make him a Shi’te or his Kim Jong-Il beer mug make him a follower of the North Korean path to the workers’ paradise.

Real National Socialists despise Krafft for taking Hitler and the swastika “in vain.” No paleo- or neo-Nazi would put Hitler on a teapot.

The primary effect of this anti-Krafft campaign has been to recommend his art to super-rich collectors in the Orient, where Hitler is used to sell noodles and the Holocaust is just another restaurant theme.

Meanwhile, super-hip progressive Americans have another opportunity to demonstrate yet again that their default moral programming dates back to 17th-century New England villages like Salem.

That was a very well crafted comment, Greg. I was particularly amused by the last two paragraphs.

There is a tremendous need for incisive yet inoffensive racial commentary like that (of all sorts of lengths, depths, breadths etc). Such commentary is effective in establishing the baseline credibility of the WN or racialist position among the thinking set and, because it does not insist that it is the only possible or permissible political attitude, even succeeds in attracting some of those predisposed to reject it by allowing them to (painfully slowly) mull their way in its direction, overcoming an unusual difficulty that WN has long struggled to recognize: that it is too well argued for its own good.

The distinction is all too subtle for Linderite simpletons, who understand and respect only force and mistakenly assume all others are similarly constituted. But it is that subtlety that gets parishioners’ bums in church, where they will at least hear the sermon, whether or not they ultimately accept or reject it; it is that subtlety that gets the patient on the operating table, where the procedure may or may not save his life; and it is that subtlety that establishes whites are well within their rights to be concerned about their racial future, regardless of any specific plan of action to address to those concerns.

Thanks for your kind words. I was hoping to see a good discussion pop up there, but having looked at a couple of HuffPo threads, I concluded that it has no intelligent readers, just smug, vain, middlebrow vulgarians.

Oh ferchriss… “So when did you stop beating your wife?”. Reading the comments on the first article was exasperating. A lot of well he called me a fag in highschool, and non argument ritual defamation. I expect the article and comments on that mainstream progressive sewer would send me into cardiac distress.

Like this post, one of the many things that can be done with it is journalism to tell the real stories and document the persecution of white people who have dared to be publicly racially conscious and outspoken about white self-interests.

If Camp is the Lie that tells the Truth than kitsch is the lie tell that tells a lie – it makes small that which is Large. Yet the need might be there. Consider the Contraries of the Plains Indian religion: they would do things like walk backwards, say yes for no, jump in mud puddles to go swimming – and catcall Medicine Men at the all important Sun Dance Ceremony. As one commentator noted, this would be the equivalent of nuns mooning the Pope in Vatican Square. Europeans once had the Saturnalia and the medevial Feast of Fools. So now poor kitsch has to relieve our pressure. It’s asking too much.

I have enjoyed his craftwork for some time and really enjoyed the audio interview with him. I found him to be intelligent and balanced in his approach to the taboo subjects that are the point of this peice. Actually that interview was sort of my introduction to this site and radical traditionalism, alternative right thought. I would very much like to send him an email of support or purchase one of his works if its within my means . I am in the midst of watching a good women be publicly brow beaten and defamed as an “antisemite” now and it is indeed as a game of telephone via whispers and allusions. So sick of this.

The intelligentsia are going to split on this because ultimately what they fear is the Krafft spoofed them. Some will want to crucify him for this while others will want to hush it up and hope it goes away to avoid further embarrassment. I run in a pretty broke ass circle but I’ve come across a few people who have scraped up enough cash to acquire one or more of Mr. Krafft’s pieces and almost everyone that I’ve ever met that has one of his pieces has a personal story about knowing or meeting him and how he had inspired or encouraged them to pursue their art. His standing is unimpeachable.

I feel safe saying that this man is being set up for unjust persecution and that he seems like a good man. But Hitler teapots? And the comic use of the Swastika? There is a proper use of sacred symbols. I hear what Mr Johnson is saying – that this fill a need. But it also will rub others the wrong way.

On the other hand, perhaps subject title in The Stranger will make the curious do more research on the so-called holyhoax and finally see thru jewish lies. It is said any publicity is good for us in the long term. I’ve read some of the reader comments there – there’s more than a handful of readers disputing the holyhoax.

Wilcox’s article focuses simply on defining what ritual defamation is and what it involves, but doesn’t provide any case studies. Daniel McGowan uses Wilcox’s article to introduce an account of his experience of ritual defamation at:

Jews are quite adept at using ritual defamation to punish goyim who threaten their interests. They effectively use swarming tactics, mobilizing relatively large numbers of Jews and shabbos goyim to bully, besmirch, and bankrupt any and all perceived enemies. And with characteristic chutzpah, they claim to be promoting “tolerance” and “human rights” against the evil forces of “bigotry” and “hate.” They even have an outfit called the “Anti-Defamation League.”

I know that most people here are already aware of this, but this speaks volumes about the real status of “free speech” in the land of the free today. Artists who participated in the Black Arts Movement, the artistic arm of the Black power movement, such as Nikki Giovanni and Maya Angelou are lauded with professorships and invitations to speak at presidential inaugurations.

It would be funny to start giving Hitler teapots to one’s friends as Christmas gifts.

“I am not, however, claiming that there is no connection between Charles Krafft’s use of Nazi images in his art and his later intellectual journey.”

Four or five years after the 9/11 attacks on New York, I started learning about the Jewish problem thanks to the Internet. A little later, I also realized that “the-holocaust” was a “deliberately exaggerated myth”. Before that, I was already fed up with the holocaust propaganda, but had never paid any attention to the revisionist point of view. I think I realized the Jewish story was a lie when I read Fred Scrooby’s comments. Anyway, I would have learned the truth eventually. For two reasons: I spend time on anti-immigration forums, and I have always thought that the demonization of people like Hitler, Khomeini, or Saddam Hussein went too far and made no sense, even when I used to see the Americans as the good guys in WW2.

Actually, the Jews slander us in the same way they have been slandering the Nazis. And they call us Nazis too. It makes it all the more difficult to consider seriously anything they say about the Nazis. Why would they be more honest about the Nazis than about Charles Krafft and ten thousand other fine people?

“the agenda of white dispossession and race replacement. For instance, in Norway and Sweden…”

Latest news from Sweden: The Swedish Public Employment Service plans to open an office in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa in an effort to prepare emigrating Somalis for life in Sweden!!! (source)

I met Charlie through a mutual friend in the summer of 05. At that time I would never have defined him as a Nazi or White Nationalist. He seemed to me to be just an open minded person and one who didnt share the brainwashed attitudes so many lemmings have today.

I love his art. I think I will send him a jar of our Swastika Brand Honey.

[…] assessment of Krafft’s intent, based on sloppy scholarship and reasoning. As I argued in “The Persecution of Charles Krafft,” his use of the swastika and associated images predates his interest in Holocaust revisionism by […]

[…] written by a fellow white nationalist defending Krafft (it has 25 likes and two shares). “The Persecution of Charles Krafft,” published at a site called Counter-Currents Publishing, starts off quite […]